Ask a GM

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Somebody conducted an excellent "Ask a news director" thread here recently. I'll offer the same.

Background: news, sales, operations. GM since 1990. I'll answer any questions you have to the best of my ability, but will obviously stop short of commenting on specific stations or other gm's.

Let 'er rip.

[imported_Make it a double]

Why do GM's lie so often???

If you're asked a direct question, why not be candid and frank with that person, or staff for that matter?

I never understood how a GM can look someone in the eye and blatantly lie, when the career of so many are on the line.

I'm not asking about being vague regarding programming or other management related issues, but when someone asks you a direct question about their future, they should be given the truth.

Unfortunately, I don't think anything you post here will change the perception that GM's are just bred to lie.

[imported_Seraph]

What's it like to not have a soul?

[HappyMadison]

Originally posted by Seraph:
What's it like to not have a soul?http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/lachen/laughing-smiley-014.gif

[Eeps Snorps Now]

My observation both before I got this job and afterward is that you are largely correct. The best answer I can give you is that the individuals to which you refer had no soul and were lying a$$holes before they became GM's; they probably honed those bad habits when they got the "big gig" because there were no peers left to call them on their bad behavior.

I hate to toss around stereotypes, but the GM's I've met who strictly have a sales background are most likely to manage "top down" and exhibit bad personal behavior. Those with a news background are more likely to empathize with their peeps and treat them with respect. Again, broad generalizations, but that's been my experience.

I do have several GM friends who are great people, consider their employees their most important "customers" and try to manage through tough operational or financial situations as empathetically as possible. Unfortunately, they can't make everyone happy all of the time, so if they piss someone off who is popular and talks a lot, the GM inevitably gets labled a soul-less liar. I certainly have. Some agreed, some came to my defense.

I also know some who truly do not deserve air. Unfortunately, they tend to be revered by many ownership groups because when they all get together, those who display the most testosterone are perceived as the most effective managers. So they tend to proliferate and be promoted to larger stations.

Finally, remember that the GM cannot share with you every reason he/she makes a decision or has to change a prior decision. There are frequently...almost inevitably...factors that cannot be discussed for policy or even legal reasons. Someone above him may have changed his mind or an attorney may have changed a recommendation, etc.

All that said, in summary some people were just born to be a$$holes. But most of them don't affect your life to the degree the GM (or department manager) of your station does.

[Emily Latella]

I never liked GMs. I'd much rather own a Toyota.

[roy]

When you contact someone about an interview, generally speaking how serious are you

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Normally I don't directly insinuate myself into a search unless it's a department manager where I'd be doing the actual hire.

Other stations operate differently; the GM may be the actual decisionmaker on a hire such as news talent, account executives, etc. or at least inordinately influential as to who gets the job.

In any case, I'd say that if you're getting a personal call from a station's GM, you're either their pick or on the short list.

Good time to remind that how you get treated on the call is probably a pretty good window into the personality of the station. If the GM is open and forthcoming, chances are the station will be a decent place to work. IF the GM is aloof, dictatorial and an obvious headcase, then don't just walk...run. Chances are your ND will either be similar or a mental case trying to deal with his/her own boss.

[Produce man]

I'm a Ford man, myself.

[Mighty Dyckerson]

Originally posted by Produce man:
I'm a Ford man, myself.I'd have figured you more of a Yugo man.

[Mighty Dyckerson]

As a GM, what do you find is the best way to ***** up a station? Consultants? Cheap, unproven automation? Firing your most experienced exployees?

[s'news]

Originally posted by Seraph:
What's it like to not have a soul?Memo to moderators: Please put this into the MediaLine Hall of Fame.

[ISTHISTHINGON?]

Note to G.M.....
If you want your soul back, "ASK A DEVIL"
*Guest

[Produce man]

Originally posted by Mighty Dyckerson:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Produce man:
I'm a Ford man, myself.I'd have figured you more of a Yugo man.</font>[/QUOTE]Nope, I like my '06 Mustang GT over a Yugo.

I'd picture you as a Vespa kinda girl.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Mighty Dyckerson:
As a GM, what do you find is the best way to ***** up a station? Consultants? Cheap, unproven automation? Firing your most experienced exployees?All of those can be pretty effective toward that end, properly deployed. Not having a clue as to your employees' names or what they do works really well too.

#12 next. Now serving #12.

[Poo(h)]

No idea who you are .. but if you've been sued by a former employee, did you ever believe the former employee had a true, solid case? And if so, what did you do to intervene -- well, if you COULD do anything?

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Have never been sued, so really can't comment from personal experience.

Would hope we'd never put ourselves in the position of a former employee having an actionable case against us, but if it were to happen, I don't know if there would be any intervening...by that point I'd probably be acting on advise of our evil attorney.

[Stiffler]

How iron clad are your contracts? Can I get out early? Can I ask for more money in the middle of a contract if I got ripped off so my news director could make budget bonuses??

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Stiffler:
How iron clad are your contracts? Can I get out early? Can I ask for more money in the middle of a contract if I got ripped off so my news director could make budget bonuses??1. Very. An employee jumped his contract several years ago and since then everyone who signs a contract with us is saddled with a liquidated damages clause.

2. Yes, you can always ask. Probably won't get it, but if you feel you have a case for additional compensation in the middle of a contract (have taken on additional responsibilities, etc) or are willing to extend its term, make your case in a businesslike manner. Good chance the GM really doesn't know about the additional work you're doing. See my first response above for possible GM responses. You'll probably know which one to expect about 5 nanoseconds after you bring the subject of more money up. ; )

Have never heard of an ND not living up to the specified terms of a contract in order to save money to meet operating budget bonus goals, but if that really happened to you, do something about it. Yes...absolutely go to your GM with contract and check stubs in hand and ask him/her to live up to the terms of your agreement. If you get blown off, contact the HR officer of the station's parent company.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Stiffler:
Can I get out early?Sorry, I failed to answer this one.

I have let a few people out of contracts before the conclusion of their terms for various reasons.

In one case, there was a legitimate family situation that required that the employee return to his hometown to care for an aging parent. No sense in being a hard-a** about that.

In another case, the employee turned out to be, well, awful. Truly a bad hire on our part. We counseled him on his performance problems and gave additional training, etc. Didn't take. By that time the employee understood that he reeked and confessed that he only got into it because of pressure from his parents. We agreed to dissolve the contract. He left the industry.

I routinely let folks who are on second or third contract extensions out early if they find the gig of their dreams in a larger market. BTW, several of these folks have become friends and some post on Medialine & TVSpy. They've also become great referral sources for new employees to my station. What goes around comes around.

[Delicious Bass]

Sinful, I guess the only real question I have is why more GM's and ND's don't exhibit more sensitivity and respect when following up with finalists for jobs. I realize you are all very busy, but if you've already taken the time to fly me in for an interview as one of your finalists, I don't understand why you also can't then pick up the phone or simply fire off a quick email to say, 'sorry, we went with someone else.' Too often, GM's and ND's treat finalists and interviewees like garbage, and I think it reflects poorly on the station.

I always admired management that got back to a finalist, even to offer a critique or two. Like you yourself said, what goes around comes around. This is a funny business and you never know when you might be working in the same newsroom with that person in the future.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Yep, can't agree with you more. I remember having exactly that experience at more than one station, which is probably why I insist that any applicant who has personally interviewed for a job in the station gets a personal call from either a department head or (if the job opening is department manager-level) me.

There is no excuse for what you describe. It's just lazy managing. And yes, it's rude, disrespectful, and word gets around. But, as my former employee who jumped a contract and spawned liquidated damages clauses for everyone in his wake demonstrated, bad behavior exists on both sides of the management divide. I don't think either side can make any real claim to the moral high ground these days, and you can only legislate against it so far if at all.

[Kelvin Hemholtz]

What's been your observation in larger markets when it comes to hiring front-line talent? Who gets the final say...ND or GM?

Would it be AS important to meet GM's by going to say an NAB vs only going to network at an RTNDA or an AP convention?

I've heard both methods employed by people. Seems like just getting to know people in hiring positions is the hardest.

What do you suggest?

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Well, again I have to qualify my response by saying each shop...and gm...is different. Believe it or not, some of them don't address these matters in a seemingly rational manner. Shocking, I know. ; )

Generally the ND conducts frontline talent searchs (anchors, mets, on-air sportos) with the GM peering to some degree over his/her shoulder. In some shops, the GM gets the courtesy of seeing the ND's choice of candidate (or short list of final candidates). In others the GM micromanages the whole process. But only in rare instances...no matter the market size...will those positions be filled without the GM signing off on the hire and probably getting involved in the negotiation as well. Remember that the position is budgeted for a certain amount, and there will be no deviation beyond that amount unless the ND goes to bat for you and makes a compelling case to raise the ante.

For reporters, producers, etc...it's probably 25-75. The GM may or may not be involved in the hire. In a general sense I'd say it falls along the same lines I described in a previous post; those who come from a news background (25) and those who come from sales (75). If you've got a sales-focused GM, he/she will probably only have a vague idea you've been hired. If from news, he/she will probably have already met you during the in-station interview and will have at least signed off on yr hire.

Yeah, I'm a big proponent of having you "filter" anecdotally & informally from the GM to the ND well before the formal prospecting for an open position even begins. I'd do this on a selective basis. If you walk through NAB handing out tapes to anyone with a Rolex and a pair of Gucci's, you probably won't make much of an impression.

But, if you have a particular market or station in which you are interested, research both the station AND the GM first. Don't recite his or his station's bio, but be ready to discuss both with some basis of knowledge.

I'm not advocating full-bore stalking here, but find a time the individual is sitting at a bar, etc, and go have a drink. When the time's appropriate, be professional about it. Go introduce yourself, chat him/her up and make it clear that you have specific knowledge of his station, market AND competition (if you're about to make a good impression, you want to subtly play to his defensive instincts). Explain that you are very interested in joining his station at the conclusion of your contract period or sometime in the future and ask if he'd be willing to view your tape at his leisure and give you some feedback well before the process of actually applying for a future opening would begin.

In short, develop the GM as your internal champion at his station. One of two things will happen. You'll get blown off (politely or otherwise); perhaps the fellow will even vomit on your shoes from spending too much time at the bar during NAB. Or, you'll begin the process of developing an ally who will share your tape with the ND, and in most shops that means you've done the single most important thing: You've stood out from the crowd of applicants.

Even if the feedback from the GM and the reply from you is via E-mail or phone, follow up with a formal thank-you letter. Make sure the damn thing is spelled and structured correctly. You can't believe how many people who claim to be journalists have absolutely no written command of the English language. Spell his/her name correctly and nail his title. If he's a VP & GM, don't refer to him as "station manager." Two different positions within the industry even if they look the same to you.

Oh, also, try and get the call letters right. I've had every combination of my station's call letters sent to me in applicant letters. Next.

BTW, you don't have to wait for NAB. Go visit the town...arrange for a tour of the station, and make sure you get a chance to meet the GM. We have egos just like you (generally pathological, just like our employees, but I digress). We're in the TV business after all, and are usually flattered when someone who doesn't owe their very lives to us (just kidding) asks us sincerely for our generally-worthless opinion on something.

Oh...believe it or not, a GM probably has better instincts on who will be a good "fit" with the station than you might give him/her credit for, even if he's from a sales background. I've fished tapes out of the ND's trash can of applicants who ultimately got hired and distinguished themselves at our station. I've also winced at some of the "picks" my ND has brought to me. Yes, the GM at my station very much is involved in the frontline talent selection process...but if my ND says "no way" or "back off" I'll do so. In the end, HE (SHE) has to live with the hire. As much as we look like Satan to you (some deservedly so), most GM's will afford their ND's at least that degree of respect and autonomy.

Try and exercise the gift of self-knowledge. If you're a beginner or you just aren't that good or you've been beaten with an ugly stick (this is a visual medium, guys), make sure the GM you stalk is at least market-appropriate. Follow the same rules of engagement I always practiced at bars when I was single:

1. Go ugly early

2. Drink 'em pretty

3. If you don't succeed, lower your standards.

[ March 07, 2006, 06:16 AM: Message edited by: Gravefully Sinful ]

[ISTHISTHINGON?]

1. Go ugly early

2. Drink 'em pretty

3. If you don't succeed, lower your standards.

Nice....had a couple regulars practice such a gameplan back in my bartending days.
*Guest

[Kelvin Hemholtz]

Thanks for the info!

Can I buy you a drink?

LOL!!!!

And no, not all GM's are seen as the devil by us "grunts." I've had quite a few that I really liked, respected and could deal with face to face on any number of issues. A few were out of touch with what we were doing, but for the most part, lots of positive experiences. The GM is often seen as the equivalent of the Principal at school while the ND is usually the one who is seen more as the Assistant Principal for Disciplinary Affairs. The whole good cop, bad cop thing.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

I'm in one of those markets most job-hunters usually need to "drink pretty." ; )

That's why we try to treat the good ones really, really well!

[Tripe Face]

In a range of 10 to 15%, what is your station's profit margin?

[Roy Hobbs]

G.S....appreciate your no-B.S.

Okay...I know of a situation where the hands off, rarely there, slightly neurotic ND is running the news dept. into the ground with incompetent, lazy youngun's in mgmt. who treat the experienced, motivated folks badly.

The ND seems to be getting away with it while the GM stands by from afar sympathetically at the revolving (sometimes revolting) door. Is the ND getting away with it or is the GM not as removed (or tacitly approving) as we think?

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Tripe Face:
In a range of 10 to 15%, what is your station's profit margin?LOL! If I did 15% margins i'd be unemployed and spending more time on Medialine.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Roy O' Hobbs:
G.S....appreciate your no-B.S.

Is the ND getting away with it or is the GM not as removed (or tacitly approving) as we think?I'd guess a little of each. I have veterans here who are the backbone of our news department. I also have some veterans here who are essentially overpaid boat anchors.

So it's kind of like the blind man and the elephant...how you view what's going on has lots to do with your perspective of it. I'm not defending what's going on in your station...just saying that, like a good news story, I'd have to look at it from all sides before making up my own mind as to what the real deal was. Wish I could be more helpful...

[kmfdmatt]

GM: Would you consider it bad form for a ND at an employee's sister station to not call back after an interview for a possible transfer hire, especially if such a call was promised, and if such interview was sanctioned by the current ND?

[LunchPenalty]

Your view of unions?

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by kmfdmatt:
GM: Would you consider it bad form for a ND at an employee's sister station to not call back after an interview for a possible transfer hire, especially if such a call was promised, and if such interview was sanctioned by the current ND?Yes.

[Big City]

Why won't stations pull the trigger and improve equipment? I've been far too many meetings where the GM rallys the troops and says the station is doing well, etc... but the crappy cameras and editing equipment remain.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by LunchPenalty:
Your view of unions?I think they're an an anachronism of an industry that no longer exists in the same form. They are an impediment to journalism and creativity. They are a barrier to fulfilling rapidly-changing marketplace demands and most often don't do a good job representing the best interests of their membership.

While they give lip-service to quality, I think they mostly perpetuate mediocrity. I think they have hurt more people than they have protected.

Unfortunately I think there have been (and still are) shops with ownership so untrustworthy that unions remain a necessary evil. Right up to the point where the perpeptual & dysfunctional union-management culture collapses the station under its own weight.

Finally, I think my opinion won't change anyone's mind, nor do I expect it to.

[Clever Login Name]

Originally posted by Gravefully Sinful:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LunchPenalty:
Your view of unions?I think they're an an anachronism of an industry that no longer exists in the same form. They are an impediment to journalism and creativity. They are a barrier to fulfilling rapidly-changing marketplace demands and most often don't do a good job representing the best interests of their membership.

While they give lip-service to quality, I think they mostly perpetuate mediocrity. I think they have hurt more people than they have protected.

Unfortunately I think there have been (and still are) shops with ownership so untrustworthy that unions remain a necessary evil. Right up to the point where the perpeptual & dysfunctional union-management culture collapses the station under its own weight.

Finally, I think my opinion won't change anyone's mind, nor do I expect it to.</font>[/QUOTE]This is about the most accurate description I've heard of unions in a very long time, in particular how bad management and inflexible unions both contribute to the collapse of a business. Well said.

[ March 08, 2006, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: Clever Login Name ]

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Big City:
Why won't stations pull the trigger and improve equipment? I've been far too many meetings where the GM rallys the troops and says the station is doing well, etc... but the crappy cameras and editing equipment remain.Capital budgets usually do not keep pace with individual station performance. They tend to be tied to other financial factors upstream from the station and dictated as much by guys with green eyeshades as guys with pocket protectors.

So just because your station is "doing well" doesn't mean you'll get to back the truck up to NAB this year. Capital budgets are generally developed three or more years in advance, firmed up during the budget preparation cycle about six months in advance, and in most cases continuously "tweaked" based on your company's ongoing financial performance or stock value.

Your station might be doing just dandy, and dropping extra dollars to your corporation's bottom line which is offsetting that bigger-market sister station that's having a sucko year because their network is in the tank and their most popular morning anchor just got popped for diddling with a 6th-grader. But because they're in a competitive fight for their lives over there, your pathetic station is giving up a disproportionate share of capital dollars so they can score a bigger Doppler Radar dish even though you're still using the one salvaged out of the nose of a WWII B-17.

Your GM is more than likely more pi$$ed off about it than you are, but it's his/her job to put a happy face on it and be a good soldier, even if he/she has to change the story he gave you last month and get branded a liar whose every word is suspect. BTW, he tried letting the CE explain it to everyone using empathy and words everyone might understand, but of course that didn't work out. ; )

Alternate scenario...constantly-changing signals from NAB mean that new P2 Mini everyone's buzzing about that was budgeted for last year (I'm just using an example here) won't be ready for primetime until next year. So, rather than leap to some other format that's been tried and true for the last five years and readily available but on its general downcycle, your company has opted to use bubble gum and duct tape to hold together that 3/4" gear you're still using for just...a....while........longer. : O

Or...maybe your GM is just a lying sack of, uh, logo golf balls.

[Tripe Face]

Originally posted by Gravefully Sinful:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tripe Face:
In a range of 10 to 15%, what is your station's profit margin?LOL! If I did 15% margins i'd be unemployed and spending more time on Medialine.</font>[/QUOTE]GS, thanks for that informative, yet cryptic response. So I gather 15% profit in local tv is considered failure?

Yet we hold congressional hearings when oil companies report 8% or 10% profits. (And Yes, I know I'm one who thinks we should slap a windfall profit tax on Big Oil, but that's another issue)

I just wonder why congress hasn't started charging local stations $100of thousands maybe millions of dollars for broadcast licenses. What do you think your bosses would do if THAT was bandied about on Capitol Hill?

[Lightweight]

Looking at the big picture where do you see local broadcast going? Sinking ship, long term growth?

From a financial standpoint... How much does your, or most stations depend on Local News and since I'm a met, I'd love here your thoughts on the local digital sub-weather channels.

P.S. Thanks for doing this, its the most valuable thread I have read in a while!! smile.gif

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Tripe Face:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Gravefully Sinful:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tripe Face:
In a range of 10 to 15%, what is your station's profit margin?LOL! If I did 15% margins i'd be unemployed and spending more time on Medialine.</font>[/QUOTE]GS, thanks for that informative, yet cryptic response. So I gather 15% profit in local tv is considered failure?

Certainly in my book.

Yet we hold congressional hearings when oil companies report 8% or 10% profits. (And Yes, I know I'm one who thinks we should slap a windfall profit tax on Big Oil, but that's another issue)

The grocery store industry operates at about 1% margins. Should we give them federal aid??

I just wonder why congress hasn't started charging local stations $100of thousands maybe millions of dollars for broadcast licenses. What do you think your bosses would do if THAT was bandied about on Capitol Hill?</font>[/QUOTE]They'd eliminate your job and mine. Medialine.com would turn into Crabsinabucket.com.

[Tripe Face]

I love crabs, steamed blue crabs to be exact, but I prefer them on a picnic table next to a keg o' beer on ice!

As for the grocery stores... in a way we DO subsidize them... through subsidies of their raw products.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Lightweight:
Looking at the big picture where do you see local broadcast going? Sinking ship, long term growth?

From a financial standpoint... How much does your, or most stations depend on Local News and since I'm a met, I'd love here your thoughts on the local digital sub-weather channels.

P.S. Thanks for doing this, its the most valuable thread I have read in a while!! smile.gif I see a future for local broadcasters who understand they are in the software, programming and marketing business, and are flexible and creative enough to deploy their product through the various and ever-changing distribution platforms necessary to respond to (and indeed stay ahead of) the marketplace. We will be increasingly interactive, nonlinear in presentation, and will find ourselves much deeper into the advertiser service and product delivery loop.

Local broadcasters & TV stations who do linear newscasts, think they've done their job and then call it a day will be toast.

Few markets will sustain more than one or two "conventional" local news operations.

Television station employees who define their role narrowly will lose their value more quickly than those who multitask and respond to the demands of the quickly-changing marketplace.

Your website is your new TV station. I obsess over my station's website and take great pride when we do a good job of using it to break stories and extend the product (news and otherwise) we put on our air. My ND and sales managers hear from me when we don't. I consider it my city's 21st Century Newspaper. It scares my local paper to death, which gives me great pleasure. There is not a revenue stream in the paper that I'm not trying to get a piece of. If I don't do this I'll be doing my Company, my station, my viewers, my advertisers and my employees a disservice.

If your station does not already have a branded presence on PDA's, you should wonder why not.

My station's local newscasts provide the majority of our "programming value." We have many decades of equity built up with our viewers. My network's fortunes rise and fall and rise and fall. My station's performance does not.

The importance of my weather product cannot be overstated. We have a 24-hour weather channel on our digital spectrum, and it is carried on the digitial tier of our local cable systems. I consider it very important. When severe weather happens, we break into programming on both our main channel and weather channel. We do updates and squeezebacks on the main channel for those who want to continue watching regular programming, but my mets stay with the severe weather story on the weather channel until the threat has passed for those who want constant info on the storm.

In the future, trains will fly.

Peaches will be square and easy to stack.

[ March 08, 2006, 09:46 PM: Message edited by: Gravefully Sinful ]

[Roy Hobbs]

In the future, trains will fly.

Peaches will be square and easy to stack.
----------------
...and we'll all feel a little more comfortable talking to our GM.
http://www.technovelgy.com/graphics/content05/KITT-interor.jpg

[brs1905]

Do you think the new CW will work, or end up like its parents?

Also, do you believe that the usage rates seen in Asia for video on wireless will be seen in the US within the next 18 months?

Also, for a 100+ market, what do you see as reasonable expectations of interactive services (revenue, site page views, newsletter subscribers, text alert subscribers, etc)?

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by brs1905:
Do you think the new CW will work, or end up like its parents?

Also, do you believe that the usage rates seen in Asia for video on wireless will be seen in the US within the next 18 months?

Also, for a 100+ market, what do you see as reasonable expectations of interactive services (revenue, site page views, newsletter subscribers, text alert subscribers, etc)?1. I think it has a better chance of surviving than its two parents did independently. Then again, my track record on calling these sorts of things is pretty awful.

2. Yes, absolutely. And what a shame (but a reality) that we have to look to Asia and Europe to see what we'll be dealing with here in the next 18 months in terms of technical innovations making it to the marketplace.

3. I think that our real competition, no matter whether you're in NYC or Miles City, Montana or anywhere in between, is not other TV stations but irrelevance. So the whole concept of market size is another one of those anachronisms in terms of how you should view your competitive landscape. Believe it or not, your viewers can live their lives just fine without ever watching one of your over-the-air newscasts (and an increasing number of them have been doing that for years). Rising technologies generally don't observe market sizes to any appreciable degree if at all. (I think that will come as a shock to many of you in "top 5 markets. Get over it.)

As such, you'd better get your product out there and promoted and monetized as quickly and as aggressively as possible on every distribution platform that has risen above the public's radar (or is about to). You can either take the lead in your local market or you can be a follower. Which your station chooses will determine how your "rising" audience (and an appreciable number of "50-to-deathers") will perceive you and your brand. If your programming/revenue benchmark as a local broadcaster is to be "reasonable," you're likely going to wind up as toast.

Oligopoly stations don't get a free pass on this one, though slackers in dominant market positions will be able to delay the inevitable longer than slackers which are currently in weak market positions.

[Shot A Load]

This is one of the best threads I've read on this board. Informative, insightful and honest. Is this Medialine?

[The Mockingbird]

A profit of 50 cents on the dollar and more is not unheard of in TV.

[Anchor Reporter Dude]

From a sales veiw it is getting harder and hardr to convince advertisers to run on local stations especially in the access daypart. Sitcom reruns are all over cable and access numbers are down because of it. I have heard someone say that the stations with the most local content in each market area will win. I happen to agree with thta. Just like most cities only have one local paper now.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Anchor Reporter Dude:
From a sales veiw it is getting harder and hardr to convince advertisers to run on local stations especially in the access daypart. Sitcom reruns are all over cable and access numbers are down because of it. I have heard someone say that the stations with the most local content in each market area will win. I happen to agree with thta. Just like most cities only have one local paper now.You didn't frame your post as a question, but I'll go ahead and respond to it anyway. Hard to draw all these issues with a broad brush, but I generally agree that if given a choice, stations would prefer to stake their claim with their own originally-produced program content than programming provided by vendor, be that a network partner or syndicators.

As to being harder to convince advertisers to run on a local station and prime access ratings being down, that's really a market-by-market, station-by-station issue. Certainly the proliferation of cable, satellite, DVD's, and even Internet-delivered content has eaten into most local markets' HUTS (households using television) or at least your station's share of those HUTS.

Here's the deal, and you certainly won't hear this from your own gm, even if it's true at your place. Some stations just don't have good sales operations. Most of their account execs and sales managers couldn't sell hookers on a troop train on credit.

Put a couple of dominant stations in a market with those kind of sales problems, and what's going to happen is that the market cost-per-point is going to get depressed and they're going to load up their inventory with bonus weight (no-charge or broad daypart rotators) just to get a "piece of the buys."

Ironically, to news department employees, these stations tend to look the most healthy because all the commercial breaks are full. But in reality the farm is being given away, and the money that might be flowing into these stations is being diverted to other media or other markets. That's a sales issue, not a news or programming issue.

So as to "whomever having the most local content winning," that's a bit simplistic (though if my Medialine name was Anchor Reporter Dude i'd sure as hell say the same thing). Most core revenue really does come down to ratings, and if you're a dominant news station, leveraging your news operation into expanded inventory really does make a lot of sense. New or expanded newscasts frequently find audiences relatively quickly and frequently outperform the syndicated programming they displace.

Now, here's the flip side of that. If you are in a #2 or #3 or (God forbid) #4 or #5 station, it shouldn't surprise you that your fixed costs of covering and promoting local news are not all that different from the market leader. In fact, there's a good chance you'll have to spend more than the lead dog to make your move in the marketplace or hell, just to stay in the game.

So if you're Station A and you have a $2-mil annual news budget and you produce 100 GRP's (gross rating points) and Station B has the same budget and produces 50 GRPs and that dirtbag #3 produces 10 GRP's, guess which news operation is most likely to survive.

Truth is, #2 or 3 may well (and probably do) have news products which are journalistically superior to #1. No one said life was fair.

Remember, your livelihood in the news business is disproportionately driven by older viewers, and it is very, very difficult to convince them to secularly change their engrained viewing habits. Nowadays, as I've alluded to in a previous post, you should be just as worried about core viewers abandoning local tv news altogether as sampling other stations which essentially do the same thing you do.

To be fair, some stations have excellent sales operations which do a wonderful job leveraging what inventory and other assets they have at their disposal into more revenue than a less aggressive & creative station would enjoy. If you are in one of these stations, swallow your pride and hug an account exec or sales manager today. They are helping to keep you employed.

We'd all like to think it comes down to doing quality journalism, and sometimes it does. But there are so many other contributing factors. That's why frontline talent is so important. Like 'em or not, they are indeed the face of your news operation and can largely determine your fortunes. But over the course of time, faces without content are vulnerable, so you do have to have compelling content to back them up. In some markets (generally younger, more highly-educated ones such as Austin) frontline talent has been subordinated because the audience has made it clear they are more interested in content than stars. (Austin doesn't need news anchors for local stars; they have plenty of others.)

Or you have to put on your clown suit or something else to differentiate yourself in the marketplace.

And then in the end, it's not just the ratings you post (which remain incredibly important for the time being) but what you do with them...and how you augment them with other distribution platforms and what you do with them...and how you bundle them all together into a brand your local, regional and national spot advertisers just can't live without.

And...how you convince them to pay what they're worth rather than whoring up your market (do you sense a bit of an editorial here?).

That's why not every station will survive in the traditional local news wars. But, nature abhors a vacuum, and creative owners and managers will likely respond to the challenge by determining a viable position, or niche, in their marketplace. Those who don't will become footnotes.

That may mean abandoning local programming altogether and filling the schedule with paid longform. It may mean buying all first-run syndication. It may mean filling the schedule with nothing but barter syndication (no cash) and being very, very creative in leveraging what commercial inventory they do have with smart, compelling advertiser-driven promotions.

Or, it may mean doing an even better job of being a traditional local news provider. For those of you extracting a living from local news, that means caveat emptor when you go jobhunting. I've read a few threads here from people wringing their hands because they tied themselves to four-year contracts to stations they can't stand. They didn't do their own due-dilligence before signing on the dotted line, and now they are whining about wanting to jump their contract. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Must go now. This post has gone way too long. My general manager's sixth sense tells me there are newspeople at my station enjoying one of their two days where they don't have to worry about suits walking through. I think i'll drop in just to mess with them. ; )

[ March 11, 2006, 03:44 PM: Message edited by: Gravefully Sinful ]

[SchwettyBalls]

Are you a fundamentalist Christian? If you aren't the person I think you are, you sound just like a GM I know in the south. If you aren't this person, it is discouraging to know that the new line of "bullwhiz" is being handed down from those corporate pencil pushers right into our homes. Can you at least tell us which corporation you work for so we can file it away?

I'm a little off-balance here. On one hand, I like to see inside the mind of a GM. On the other hand, I think this GM thinks tremendously of himself (I'm about 100-percent sure this ins't a woman) and/or is nothing but a conduit for the corporate front office. It seems as if you really have little if any concern for your local station and community other than what kind of money they can make for you. To me, you sound like someone just using your station as a stepping stone to get to the corporate home office. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

To think that anyone really knows what the future of television is, or that the internet is the future of TV, or that Ipod's will be the home of future newscasts seems to be a popular trend that very well may blow up within a few years. Might not, but it might. Personally, pods are great for listening to tunes, but if I want to see a movie or watch news or any program where I'm actually trying to see the picture and not just listen to the announcer, their use is very limited.

Broadcasting history is chock-full of these predictions of revolution (AM Stereo, on demand, programmable DVD, digital signal, HDTV) and doom. Few of them have come true or made a difference in increasing ratings for local TV. But, I suspect they have made a few million for the broadcasting CEO's who have bellowed about what their cystal ball shows.

If you mentioned the word journalism in any of your missives, I missed them. It's sad that that's your perception of broadcast reality. It seems to me that the one thing you miss while you're quoting the stats of why your viewership numbers are down is that people need a base of integrity, honesty and courage in their local TV station--not a leader who is awstruck by a fellow GM who calls his employees "customers." No where in your posts is anything about the GM who won a National Emmy or has a great investigative department or who can say anything other than how great their margins were.

In-between the lines of what you write, you sound like you treat employees and viewers alike with little respect unless they can do something for you. Why not try and do something for them?

I admit I have some authority issues with my GM because he's likely going to ruin my career very soon because I don't worship the ground he walks on and I'd actually like to do some stories that make a difference. I'll never forget when our GM came to our station, he criticized the stories we'd done for our ratings period as very journalistic, but not a revenue producer. As a result, we don't spend more than a day on any story and our ratings have suffered ever since. I pray to God you are not the same GM.

Regardless, my points are personal only in the sense that you seem to do some of the things you do with such lack of respect of where your industry came from that I wonder how you or your company can possible know where it's going.

[ March 11, 2006, 09:47 PM: Message edited by: SchwettyBalls ]

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by SchwettyBalls:
Are you a fundamentalist Christian? If you aren't the person I think you are, you sound just like a GM I know in the south. If you aren't this person, it is discouraging to know that the new line of "bullwhiz" is being handed down from those corporate pencil pushers right into our homes. Can you at least tell us which corporation you work for so we can file it away?

I'm a little off-balance here. On one hand, I like to see inside the mind of a GM. On the other hand, I think this GM thinks tremendously of himself (I'm about 100-percent sure this ins't a woman) and/or is nothing but a conduit for the corporate front office. It seems as if you really have little if any concern for your local station and community other than what kind of money they can make for you. To me, you sound like someone just using your station as a stepping stone to get to the corporate home office. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

To think that anyone really knows what the future of television is, or that the internet is the future of TV, or that Ipod's will be the home of future newscasts seems to be a popular trend that very well may blow up within a few years. Might not, but it might. Personally, pods are great for listening to tunes, but if I want to see a movie or watch news or any program where I'm actually trying to see the picture and not just listen to the announcer, their use is very limited.

Broadcasting history is chock-full of these predictions of revolution (AM Stereo, on demand, programmable DVD, digital signal, HDTV) and doom. Few of them have come true or made a difference in increasing ratings for local TV. But, I suspect they have made a few million for the broadcasting CEO's who have bellowed about what their cystal ball shows.

If you mentioned the word journalism in any of your missives, I missed them. It's sad that that's your perception of broadcast reality. It seems to me that the one thing you miss while you're quoting the stats of why your viewership numbers are down is that people need a base of integrity, honesty and courage in their local TV station--not a leader who is awstruck by a fellow GM who calls his employees "customers." No where in your posts is anything about the GM who won a National Emmy or has a great investigative department or who can say anything other than how great their margins were.

In-between the lines of what you write, you sound like you treat employees and viewers alike with little respect unless they can do something for you. Why not try and do something for them?

I admit I have some authority issues with my GM because he's likely going to ruin my career very soon because I don't worship the ground he walks on and I'd actually like to do some stories that make a difference. I'll never forget when our GM came to our station, he criticized the stories we'd done for our ratings period as very journalistic, but not a revenue producer. As a result, we don't spend more than a day on any story and our ratings have suffered ever since. I pray to God you are not the same GM.

Regardless, my points are personal only in the sense that you seem to do some of the things you do with such lack of respect of where your industry came from that I wonder how you or your company can possible know where it's going.Damn. Please tell me you're not packing heat up on that belltower. : 0

[SchwettyBalls]

Ho, Ho, Ho!

graemlins/moon.gif

[bride]

How do you feel when news departments do legitimate stories about a client's business practices, and the client pulls their ads indefinitely? Do you come down on the news department?

[Pro]

That is a great question. I am eagerly looking forward to Mr. Sinful's answer! smile.gif

[Eeps Snorps Now]

For the record, Schwetty, I can say with some assurance that I'm not your gm. I can also safely say "no" to all the scud missles you fired my way, but I do wish you the best in dealing with your own boss. Sounds like you two are not a match made in Heaven, and you should get out of there as soon as contractually possible. Just curious; is this your first TV job? I see you're new on Medialine.

On to the next question, which I've sort of been waiting for someone to ask (surprised it took this long).

Here's that qualification again. I can only tell you how I handle it. In fact, I've discussed this matter publicly as a panel member in a national industry convention. Remember that I have a news as well as sales background, so I've got plenty of personal experience with this from the perspective of both the news and sales departments as well as the front office.

First, each and every major advertiser, especially those in "high risk" businesses (in terms of generating potential news stories) gets "the talk" from me in peacetime. They know the rules of operation and engagement in our station, and the fact that being an advertiser does not buy them news coverage or avoidance of same. I also broker introductions within the station so that they know who our newspeople are, and how they operate. They appreciate that, and (most of them) feel a part of our station.

Internally, I have a "never surprise your boss" rule. If the ND is about to embark on a story which is likely to negatively impact one of our advertisers, I get a heads-up. I do reserve the right to inquire about the story, ask what facts they have, how they have been authenticated, why they consider the story newsworthy. Sometimes the ND and I call our attorney to run it past him/her.

If it passes those sniff tests, I tell them to go for it. Before the story runs, if circumstances don't dictate otherwise, I observe the "never surprise your advertiser" rule. I'll call the advertiser (if there is one to call; sometimes our biggest accounts have no particular decisionmaker locally) to let him/her know that the story will air. I also ask the advertiser directly to let me know if he/she wants to cancel any advertising so that I can handle it personally. (They rarely do, though they of course are generally not pleased.)

Let the record show that the aforementioned call is sometimes not necessary; to ensure that we tell all sides of the story, the reporter may well have already spoken to the advertiser.

This has all been field-tested a number of times here. I've had some advertisers who stayed with us, but I've had others who pulled their (sometimes considerable) business quite voluably. In a few cases, the scars lasted for years, and in one case in particular, my family got sideswiped by a local "old boy" network in both professional and very personal ways in the wake of a great story we did.

These instances cost us a lot of money over the years. But they were good stories. I'm proud we did them, and it was not lost on many viewers and people in key positions in our city. They earned us a lot of journalistic credibility (FTR not the first time I've used that word in this thread, Schwetty) and each of those instances greased the way toward handling future such occurences in similar fashion.

What makes this work is that there is a lot of open communication between our ND and GSM. Folks in their departments follow their lead. They also follow the rule that any "crossover" matters between news and sales get directed solely through the department heads. The department heads in turn know that I am to be brought into any such discussion.

One final note: For us, the ledger would show that money lost from doing news stories is more than made up by the ongoing revenue stream which comes from the station's credibility and audience levels. We also happen to have excellent and supportive ownership; most if not all of my fellow managers handle these instances similarly. Of course, we know plenty others who don't.

For stations which "dabble" in news but have no particular commitment, there is tremendous pressure to perform financially even if it's at the cost of news autonomy in tough situations.

[ March 12, 2006, 10:22 PM: Message edited by: Gravefully Sinful ]

[Pro]

Wow...I AM impressed.

I've been at many places where the GM ordered stories killed because of advertiser impact. I even worked under one GM that said "If it isn't breaking news, I have the right to kill any story for whatever reason I see fit."

In fact, at one place I was at, when an "I" team was proposed, the GM said "No, because sooner or later, you're gonna piss off an advertiser. We can't have that."

Again, Mr. Sinful, I am very impressed with your attitude and logic behind the situation. But I daresay that, sadly, yours is the exception, rather than the rule.

[Mighty Dyckerson]

Originally posted by Shot O' Irish Load:
This is one of the best threads I've read on this board. Informative, insightful and honest. Is this Medialine?No, it's an idiot who is pretending he's a GM. And you suckers are falling for it.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Mighty Dyckerson:

idiot

...we do have that in common.

who is pretending

...which is where our paths diverge. I'm in the television industry, and indeed a gm.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Pro:
I've been at many places where the GM ordered stories killed because of advertiser impact. I even worked under one GM that said "If it isn't breaking news, I have the right to kill any story for whatever reason I see fit."

In fact, at one place I was at, when an "I" team was proposed, the GM said "No, because sooner or later, you're gonna piss off an advertiser. We can't have that."

Again, Mr. Sinful, I am very impressed with your attitude and logic behind the situation. But I daresay that, sadly, yours is the exception, rather than the rule.Thanks. And (deep breath here), I'll come to the support of those gm's you cite, because it's their prerogative to set those rules within your station. At the very least, they were clear as to what the rules were.

The toughest shops are the ones where the target moves and you really don't know to what degree you'll get advertiser influence on news stories.

BTW, don't call me Mr. Sinful. Gravefully's fine. And before you accept your next job, find out if everyone addresses the gm as "Mr. Whatever." That will tell you a lot. Unless he's 70 and is extended that bit of formality as a voluntary act of respect by the station's employees, consider whether you really want to work there.

[Pro]

Oh, absoluetly it is there perrogative. But it shows their attitudes about "blurring the line" between sales and news, and that kind of environment is one I'd prefer not to work in. If I have a choice, of course.

And I always call a general manager Mr./Ms. unless I go to work for them (or they request otherwise). Then I'll call them what they would prefer. I don't consider this "brown-nosing", just respect for the position. Anyone who has reached that position has (or should have) earned it, and I'll respect that, unless and until asked not to be so formal.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Good plan. I admire you for doing that, and hope you'll continue to attach yourself to stations which hold to those high journalistic standards.

I just find the whole "Mr." thing (when dictated by the gm, which it frequently is) incredibly pretentious. Most "Mr." shops I've been in tended to be managed top-down and sometimes arrogantly so.

[Randy Steinman]

GS,

I responded to your email, but for some reason it's not showing up in my "Sent Items" file.

Do you receive it?

RPS

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Sorry Randy, haven't gotten yr followup.

gs

[icarus112277]

Wow, great thread, possibly the best I've seen here.
I don't do local news, but I love to hear about the 'ins', since you never know when I will...
As a tech, who doesn't work in local news (but I think its probably the same), why do us techies never get feedback? Again this might be a market/type of work thing...but every job I've ever had there's never any feedback and its always hard to tie down who would be the person to go to...
I don't need a pat on the back or a ascolding (I hope) but to know if I'm viewed as competent or incometent is always a godo thing...and knwoing which things I should improve on is always good also. I don't even get feedback on whether or not I should actively pursue other roles- and I would like to do so. Bascially in the types of places that work at the people who pay us and the people people who schedule us have no power and the people who do are so far removed that they don't care until they get notice that one of us has to be be removed/replaced. From a managing standpoint how could this be corrected (already been mentioned to hands-on type owner with no results)?

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Excellent question, Icarus, and one that hits home for me because it's an area in which I think I do a crappy job in spite of really wanting to improve.

There are a whole litany of reasons and excuses I can give you, but in the end I think your observations are right on target. Techs tend to get short shrift of the gm's attention except, of course, when things go wrong. Then you get all the attention you can stand. So here ya go:

First and foremost, I think it's because most gm's come from sales, and secondarily from news. So to most of us, no matter how much we study up on equipment and the station's technical operation, it's mostly FM to us (....magic).

Techies tend to speak their own language, and many live in the station in the hours when managers live elsewhere.

In my station, many of them rotate through frequently enough that just when I get to know their names, they're off to that big opportunity at Wal-Mart and someone else replaces them.

Several of them look like they might enjoy walking around in human coats in their basements in their spare time. Probably a bit unfair on my part.

And finally, many ops directors rise from the ranks and excercise "closed management." That is, they have a tendency to isolate their employees organizationally from the gm and from other departments. For a lot of reasons, many gm's find that when trying to "get their arms" around the tech side of the station, there's no "there" there.

How to fix this? Get your ops director or CE to broker a casual meeting with the gm. Do it over pizza or a tray of sandwiches and do your best to find a time when all or at least most of the department can attend (and use whatever influence you can muster to ensure that they do).

Seems like a small thing, but both sides will benefit from talking openly (or talking at all). Lather. Rinse. Repeat, especially if there's lots of turnover.

Caveat: Scroll back to read my comments re unions. In some shops this probably won't work at all, because the management-union relationship is so damaged to begin with, and any interaction will probably just pour gasoline on whatever grassfires already exist.

FInally, make sure your ops director or CE is advising the gm of the great things which happen in your department, because likely as not he/she won't find out about it otherwise. And if your techs are like mine, for every screwup that hits the air, you guys have covered up three sins so effectively no one ever knew they were a problem because they wound up looking fine on the air.

So techs...if no one else tells you today:

"Dudes, like you rock."

Thanks Icarus. Now I feel marginally better.

[icarus112277]

Well first thanks.

Second, and again (though thanks for the advice because I am sure there are people in a more similiar situation who need it), but in my specific situation and for many others it is different.

Mainly for two reasons
1) no union, mostly
2) tech people here often make more (sometimes a LOT more) than producers/suits, and because of that we do take ourselves seriously
We're not hacks, and certainly not leaving for Wal-Mart (no Wal-Mart here anyways thank god)

Sorry if I needed to frame my q more precisely...but how can I /we bring up the fact that we need a little bit more feedback from someone other than co-workers?
Here are the specifics:
Us techies work for company'A', which supplies techs to our facility, others, owns several of their own facilities, and is in the live truck (the big ones) biz. So they do a lot of crewing.
AD's and Directors,w ork for company 'B', which controls the facility where we work- but they work as independent contractors, and therefore have no actual pull or say within said company, and work for a different branch.
We have 'tech managers' who work for company 'B', but who are not involved in our day to day ops, unless it is a big show (of which there are many but not the point).
The people who pay us work in an office about 30 blocks (and a couple of worlds) away. The people who crew us are nice enough, but basiclaly oblivious to ANYTHING technical, and most anything performance related- again with the exception of something really bad happening.
So far the most part we have no contact with anyone of any power, nor they with us. We attempted to broach this with the owner of our company (down because something bad had happened of course) but he is FAR too hands on (and if thats the worst I can say about an owner believe me I do love where I am) with other parts of the company to spend much attention on ours, which runs very smoothly- to a fault I guess.
I'm not alone here.
And I know this situation may be distant from what you're dealing with...but how we can approach management without a) a backlash of negativity and b) without drawing too much attention too ourselves.
I guess the best way would be to eliminate this owner altogether and establish a chain of communication which coordinated both the AD's/Directors, andf the tech manager, and fed into our crewer, who has daily contact with us.
But hw to broach thi without feeling like we're going behind our owner's (who again is a great guy but far too much into other paperwork and tech issues to concentrate on what is essentailly a well-oiled machine)?
Because many here would like some feedback and our 'superiors' (AD's and directors whom we have a TERRIFIC relationship with) have been told not to deal with us on these issues?
Its a lot of bureaucracy- thats why I need your input- sorry for the length but it is very specific...

We call it 'PFM' (pure f'ing magic) here..
How did you do that so fast?
I used the PFM switch.

[ March 12, 2006, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: icarus112277 ]

[Irony]

How would you handle a Department Head that is out of hand (power hungry outside of "allowable" bounds/micro-manager) or worthless? Are there internal management measures to protect these people (ie. managment must provide a unified front of support?) How would you treat an employee complaint about such things?

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Wow, Icarus...I guess I really don't feel qualified to give you any specific recommendation other than to determine who of your "group" (and that might be you) would best be able to have a one-on-one with the decisionmaker to confidentially lay out some of the issues and ask for his counsel. He'd need to know it was not a gripe session, and that you acknowledged that this was sharky waters for you and everyone else in the matrix of chains of command. I wouldn't have more than two or three of you in the meeting with him or it will look like you're "ganging up" and the quality of the conversation would suffer.

Necessary Caveat: In most cases, honest and open communication (even if done discreetly) advances working relationships. But when the aforementioned matrix of processes and responsibilities is based on vested interests and hidden agendas, it could well backfire. In your case, careful what you wish for, because you just might get it.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Irony:
How would you handle a Department Head that is out of hand (power hungry outside of "allowable" bounds/micro-manager) or worthless? Are there internal management measures to protect these people (ie. managment must provide a unified front of support?) How would you treat an employee complaint about such things?Actually, I deal with such issues fairly regularly. 9 times out of 10 the matter turns out to be driven mostly by conflicts of personality or varying expectations. "Power hungry" tends to be in the eye of the beholder, and never comes from an individual who has been empowered by the department head.

The degree to which your management "protects itself" or shows a unified front really does vary station by station, so I can't comment directly on that. At my station, we debate pretty openly on just about everything, but managers tend to be mutually supportive because to NOT do so simply erodes their own, and by extension the organization's, credibility.

I have an open door policy, so will listen to all takers. The first thing I'll do is to ask how much of what I'm about to hear has been brought directly to the department head in question. No surprise that the answer is generally "none, because I'm afraid of backlash, losing my job, etc."

Sometimes the employee presents concrete examples; other times the "evidence" is amorphous. Sometimes I have knowledge of the example; sometimes not. Sometimes I have information (which I may or may not be able to share with the employee) which explains why the department head acted as he/she did; sometimes I don't.

If a pattern develops that is not a witch hunt (and believe it or not, those are pretty transparent if your gm is not a complete moron him/herself) I will discreetly commence my own investigation into the department manager's actions and general style of management.

It should be noted that in my station, I embue the department managers with tremendous authority and am loathe to second-guess them on most matters. If I'm not comfortable with their leadership and I fail to help them course-correct, they'll likely be invited to pursue their dreams elsewhere.

In all cases, I try to give the employee some sort of counsel to better manage the situation as he/she is experiencing it, but remind that the department head remains his/her boss and has my support as long as they are in the position. If the individual continues to have issues, I'll broker a meeting between the three of us which results in a review of expectations on each person's part (including me) as well as specific goals and objectives for the employee and the process for measuring his/her performance against those objectives.

In some cases, the problem really does lie with the employee, and that employee ultimately departs our organization on his/her own volition, or failing that, ours.

[ March 13, 2006, 05:11 AM: Message edited by: Gravefully Sinful ]

[Mighty Dyckerson]

Let's say I'm the news director at your station, and your wife is the lead anchor. You go into your office one night after hours and catch me having sex with her on your desk. All of us are carrying firearms. How would you handle that?

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Mighty Dyckerson:
Let's say I'm the news director at your station, and your wife is the lead anchor. You go into your office one night after hours and catch me having sex with her on your desk. All of us are carrying firearms. How would you handle that?The first thing I would do is ensure that our technical crews and talent realized that your sex organ is not a Sony ECM-44 Omni-Directional Mini-Lav microphone.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by SchwettyBalls:

To think that anyone really knows what the future of television is, or that the internet is the future of TV, or that Ipod's will be the home of future newscasts seems to be a popular trend that very well may blow up within a few years. Might not, but it might. Personally, pods are great for listening to tunes, but if I want to see a movie or watch news or any program where I'm actually trying to see the picture and not just listen to the announcer, their use is very limited.
http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/13/magazines/business2/boominbitesize/index.htm

[Mighty Dyckerson]

Originally posted by Gravefully Sinful:
The first thing I would do is ensure that our technical crews and talent realized that your sex organ is not a Sony ECM-44 Omni-Directional Mini-Lav microphone.Actually, it's more like the ECM-51.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

And this just in. Knowledge is power. Anyone want to guess the implications for local TV news?

DIGITAL BUYERS STEP INTO UPFRONT RUMBLE
TV Sellers' Land Grab Pulls in New Players
March 13, 2006

By Claire Atkinson
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- If the headline fight in the upfront is between buyer and seller, this year there will be a new undercard that will pit TV buyers against their new-media counterparts.
As ABC’s “Lost” and NBC’s “The Office” move from the linear network and onto Web and wireless platforms, talk of prime time is being replaced by the buzzword du jour: video.

With TV budgets under pressure, broadcast and cable owners are making a play for the ever-increasing pool of dollars that advertisers have allocated to digital media, by pushing the fact that their programming is now available in a variety of new media formats.

That will turn the coming upfront into a multimedia marketplace and is already pitting TV buyers against digital buyers, as they battle over whether some portion of digital budgets should be pooled with upfront budgets, and who should oversee buys if so. In some cases this creates rivalries where two buyers within the same agency, but different departments, will duke it out. In other cases it’s TV buying agency vs. a completely separate digital agency.

“It is a jump ball at a lot of agencies,” said Tim Hanlon, senior VP-ventures at Denuo, the newly formed media-futures practice at Publicis Groupe. “There is a tension that has been pronounced for some time, but it is an interim issue, not a zero-sum game. ... At the very least, you have to redefine what TV is. It’s much more amorphously described as video.”

Even marketers looking to follow the consumer as they log on, download and order up, are scratching their heads about how best to execute the buy. Debbie Myers, VP-media and entertainment at Taco Bell, believes the challenge for this year’s upfront will be that “online is not housed in the buying part of the agency.” But sometimes it is. Kaki Hinton, VP-ad services, Pfizer Consumer Healthcare, said her digital budget is treated and planned “as TV.”

In other cases it’s even harder to define where it is housed. “Agencies are fighting over who buys interactive and video on demand,” one sales-side executive said. “Media agencies don’t want to become just the linear buyers. Their mantra is to tie it into the linear business and say we are one-stop shopping.” As a result, sales-side executives say they are increasingly talking directly to marketers and focusing more on the planners to find out how much of TV budgets are headed into digital offshoots.

Even on the network side, marketers are wrestling with who sells what. At ABC, Mike Shaw, president-sales, oversees ABC.com’s offering of show downloads to clients. At CBS, there’s a separate digital-ad-sales group that moved ahead of the network in selling online coverage of March Madness basketball.

Recognizing that the TV universe is mutating, the Cable Advertising Bureau last week launched its upfront strategy, dubbed “One TV World.” The idea is that cable sells itself not just as TV channels, but as video providers across multiple platforms.

Sean Cunningham, CAB’s president-CEO, said two-thirds of his calls were to planning groups, which have a greater purview over the media landscape. “Upfront history is marked by a continued evolution. ... We can show you how to get more with the same or similar budget -- ratchet up cable and you can have free money to learn about video,” he said. Mr. Cunningham added that agencies are requesting much more data on video on demand performance and that for the first time, “there is a first phase of data available.”

Larry Novenstern, who recently joined Optimedia from Deutsch, said his new title is exec VP-director of national electronic media, to reflect his wider responsibilities. Andy Donchin, director-national broadcast buying at Carat, expects his title to change.

“Our job functions are changing,” he said. “We are not only taking meeting with the A&Es and TBS’s of the world; we’re taking meetings with the Yahoos and MSNs.”

It looks like, for the most part, these video-media explorations are being taken out of the TV pot, rather than separate digital budgets. “There’s been a slow migration of broadcast dollars into video alternatives that will continue,” said Mr. Donchin.

“The prize of the skill set will be data-centric analysts; traditional TV buyers don’t have that, but online types don’t have the same sophistication when it comes to judging content,” Mr. Hanlon said. “There’s a marriage of two disciplines: a little bit country, a little bit rock ‘n’ roll.”

~ ~ ~
Abbey Klaassen and Kate MacArthur contributed to this report.

[Eeps Snorps Now]

Originally posted by Mighty Dyckerson:
Actually, it's more like the ECM-51.Well, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.